What are some of the benefits of teaching baby sign language...?
I like what Jill P. had to say. I used it with both of my kids. One I started a little later because her speech was already delayed and we wanted to curb tantrums when she couldn't communicate what she wanted. The other one we taught from birth. By 5 months old she could do the sign for "milk". By the time she was 7 months old she had a total of 5 words she could sign. It did not delay her speech in anyway. In fact, she was an early talker. The key to the whole thing with a hearing child is to use both signs and spoken words when you are speaking with the child. That way they are learning both. As they get older and start to try and say the words, encourage that as much as possible. When my little one first started trying to talk, she also still used the signs. So if she signed "more milk please", I'd actually speak it "You want more milk? Okay I can give you more milk." Soon she was saying "more milk" as she signed it and not long after she was dropping the signs. She's 2 now and it's rare when she uses baby signs because she is so verbal. For me what worked was to teach 1-3 new words at a time. Once they could recognize them and respond to them and even sign them, we worked at adding a few more. I did it this way mostly for me because I have a hard time remembering new things and wanted to really get them ingrained in my mind before moving on to new signs. The reason I taught my girls......1)to communicate with the oldest as a toddler because she was speech delayed and having tantrums over us not understanding what she wanted throughout the day and 2) with the youngest to help her communicate much earlier so we didn't go through that again.
What's the best method for teaching a foreign language?
While there can be no one best method, after 30 + years of teaching languages, I have found that TPR followed by TPRS very effective.. TPR was developed by Dr. James J. Asher in the 60s as an answer to his research question, 'Why do perfectly intelligent adults have difficulty learning a second language?" The TPR method asks students to respond to commands (stand up, sit down,) that become increasingly complicated (when Joey picks up the red book, Alice will take the green book and walk to Fred, who will count to 10). (skyoakspublications.com/ Teaching Language Through Actions (book)/ The Instructors Notebook) There are guides on the skyoaks site with lesson plans for a years worth of TPR. Many of us found TPR magic the first week or so, but difficult to sustain. TPRS (Teaching Proficiency Through Reading and Storytelling) was started in the late 80s and continues to develop and change due to input both from its proponents and from its critics. I could write probably thosands of words about it, but basically we do three things: introduce three phrases with a targeted structure and vocabulary (wanted to eat, needed, the fat cow) (the strangeness is purposeful to hold students' interest). Practice the phrases with questions, gestures, props until the students understand them well. Create a story with the students by asking them targeted questions about the vocabulary. Point out grammar points briefly (3-15 seconds) during the conversation. students read by translation related story/text by translation. start over. I've done a poor job explaining. Please go to at least one of the websites cited--they are all linked together--and consider TPRS.
Is my way of talking giving my teachers the wrong impression that I "know" my grammar and vocabulary?
There is a difference between BICS (Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills) and CALP (Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency) What I think you're saying is that you have good BICS, and people are assuming from that that you have the academic language needed for school work. Now- learning to name the parts of speech will NOT help you comprehend what you're reading. Reading is a skill that is developed through practice. You need to do a lot of reading of gradually more difficult material. Academic texts contain a lot of sentence with noun clauses, adjective clauses and adverb clauses. The sentence contain a lot of complex references and comparisons. Learning ABOUT grammar does not help you to comprehend those texts. Only practice can do that. You can look for advance ESL classes, or you can just do a lot of reading on your own.
Vocabulary provides the building blocks for all language development.?
No one method is useful for all vocabulary. Your statements are incorrect for several reasons: 1. Teaching isolated vocabulary words is never a good idea. It is far better to teach words in context, something you don't even mention. 2. You seem to think this is 1950. With today's technology, we can easily bring technology to the classroom and use YouTube or other images for both sound and motion. 3. Flash cards or drawings can be produced to teach many verbs. I prefer flash cards because I don't draw well and because drawing takes more time (if I have anticipated the vocabulary I must teach. Often students will ask questions about other vocabulary, so a quick but simple drawing is a better and more practical solution). 4. Far from being distracting, students usually find pantomime fun, and they appreciate the fact that the teacher doesn't make them sit idly during the entire class. Some students are kinetic learners, in which case pantomime is essential. As for your other criticism--that students may be confused--remember that we learn our first language largely through imitation. Generally, "explaining" is a poor choice for teaching vocabulary. The explanations often require a lot of details, and they will require more sophisticated vocabulary than the word itself. Explain "do" or "get" or "of". Another problem with explanation is that many words have more than one meaning--is it really necessary to explain that "can" is used for ability, permission, and a container all during the first exposure? On the other hand, I defy you to teach "antidisestabishmentarianism" without explaining it. You miss a few other points. You say nothing about functional goals, which are seldom related to grammar and only minimally related to vocabulary. You seem to be under the impression that teaching huge lists of vocabulary at a time can be effective, rather than trying to concentrate on quality. What about organizing vocabulary with charts, webs, and diagrams? What about simply exposing students to new vocabulary in a reading or listening exercise, and allowing passive learning? What plans do you use so your students can practice the new vocabulary they have learned, and how will you evaluate them? If you want to teach action verbs, pantomime is probably the most effective form. But don't forget Total Physical Response.
Who certifies the TESOL or TEFL certificates?
There really isn’t a difference between CELTA/TESOL/TEFL and TESL certificate courses. These are just different acronyms used for courses on how to teach English to non-native English speaking individuals. The certificates are all equally recognized and the approaches used are all very similar. CELTA stands for Certificate in English Language Teaching for Adults. TESOL stands for teaching English to speakers of other languages. TEFL is teaching English as a foreign language. You can be a TEFL teacher in a non-English speaking countries teaching students who want to learn English as a foreign language. TESL stands for teaching English as a second language. You can be a TESL teacher in an English speaking country teaching immigrants or foreign students English as a second language. With any of these certificates you can teach abroad or in an English speaking country. The major difference is that Trinity and CELTA are franchises with years of brand recognition but when it comes down to getting hired, the employer is going to choose a candidate who has either a TEFL, TESOL or CELTA certificate and most important the candidate who presents themselves as a mature professional individual with good teaching skills. TEFL courses in general are recognized internationally as long as they meet the industry standard of being at least 100 hours, having a minimum of 6 hours of teaching practice and having qualified teacher trainers. The course I did is 124 hours and offers 8 to 10 hours of teaching practice. I completed a 4 week course with TEFL Worldwide Prague 2 years ago and have been teaching ever since. They are an independant school ansd I feel it was the best choice I could have made. Good Luck!